Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

For a current project I would love some help, discussion, and references from writers and readers in this group. I've been commissioned to write a magazine piece on the uses and abuses of the "historical note" in the historical novel, from Scott to the present, and across all subgenres of historical fiction (mysteries, romances, "literary," YA, etc.). I'm looking for several things: reader responses to historical notes (do you read them first? last? are they helpful/annoying/entertaining?); particularly unusual, entertaining, or controversial usages of the historical note (any favorite or least favorite examples?); your own motives as writers in producing a historical note; and so on. Who writes the best historical notes, and why do you think so? I'll be able to use only a very small number of examples, of course, but I hope this query sparks some discussion--if not I'll just keep digging on my own. Thanks!

I like author´s notes in HF books, and I usually read them, providing:
1) they are placed as back matter, never at the preface.
2) never placed in the text as footnotes or even references.
This way, author´s notes about history are a supplementary reading, and plainly optional to the reader, not disturbing the reader´s immersion in the fictional atmosphere.
This is what I do when I´m writing, too.

I'm a western writer, and in particular, write about the Pony Express. There's a lot of myths floating around about the PE. So I wrote an article for my blog about fact vs fiction and plan to include it in the back of the anthology I'm finishing up now.

My readers clearly like history, and have commented as much. And they've asked historical questions on my blog. So while I don't interrupt my stories with a history lesson, there's going to be one in there if they care to read it.

I love historical notes, under the same conditions as Pedro. I don't want to read footnotes in a novel, unless they are part of the novel, as in Jasper Fforde's Thursday Next series. And I read the historical note not so much because I want to see exactly where the author deviated from history as because I want to stay attached a little longer to a story that has caught me up in it emotionally. So if I don't like the novel, I won't bother with the historical note.

The one exception to the placement comment is The Sekhmet Bed, where the note really helped clarify some of the word usage in the book, so it needed to be read first.

I add historical notes to the back of all my historical novels. This is mostly because I'm a historian and obsessive about clarifying for my peers that when I deviate from the historical record, I'm doing it deliberately and not out of ignorance. But medieval Russia is also unfamiliar to most readers, and the Tatars even less so. As a result, I think it is useful to provide a bit of background information for people who may be interested in learning more about that time and place.

As for examples, I suggest Sacred Treason by James Forrester (pen name of the historian Ian Mortimer) or any of the Uhtred books by Bernard Cornwell. The one to The Pagan Lord was particularly good.

Mine are, of course, exemplars of the highest order, but Bernard is just a tad better known. ;-)

I love historical notes. Although they are usually at the end of a book, I tend to read them once I've gotten into the story and want to know a little more. I'm currently reading and skipped ahead to read them after about 100 pages. SKP's, at least for this book, are lengthy, but always interesting.

On the whole, though, I would say that less is usually more.

P.S. Do let us know when and where the article appears!

Steven Saylor writes excellent historical notes at the end of his Roma Sub Roma series. If I am familiar with a subject matter, I will sometimes read the historical note first just to get a feel for the author. In the case of Saylor's notes, do not read the historical note first. Saylor always has a timeline of events included in his author notes. I like the timeline. It helps put things occurring outside of his main story in perspective. It makes everything tie together nicely. You will spoil the book. He does warn you of this but people don't always listen. I do have an opinion about an author who I think writes terrible notes but I hesitate to say it since she's an author a lot of people tend to love.

C.P. sorry...are you referring to my article? It's on my blog already in draft form. I throw my draft onto my blog, and then collect it up, format it, and have it edited and otherwise cleaned up.

Here's the link to it, if you're interested.

I recently read a historical mystery and thought that the historical note was much better than the book. I always appreciate a good historical note whether or not I had a high opinion of the book. If it represents good research, it's useful in itself because it may give me leads to further reading.

I always appreciate notes. But I am conflicted about where they belong. In the beginning of the book? Possible spoilers. At the end of the book? Too late to prevent me from making a fool of myself by spouting "facts" to friends from the book I'm in the middle of reading... which are later dispelled in the historical notes. I guess the moral is that I have to remember that it is historical FICTION and talk about the plot line, rather than "newly discovered" facts about an historic event. Authors write so convincingly and I am easily led, I guess. Bruce, please send out a link when your article is published; I'm curious to know what you learn. TIA

Regina wrote: "C.P. sorry...are you referring to my article? It's on my blog already in draft form. I throw my draft onto my blog, and then collect it up, format it, and have it edited and otherwise cleaned up.
..."

I meant Bruce's article, when he finishes it, but I'd love to read yours, too. Thanks for the link!

EDIT: And very informative it was, too. Only 18 months, really? Not to mention that $5 a letter wasn't cheap, to put it mildly. I had no idea.

I really enjoy historical notes, for many reasons.
Some provide context about time and place (i.e. perhaps re: political events that have created the culture/atmosphere prior to the novel's beginning). These I like at the start of a book. If I recall correctly, Steven Pressfield does this.

Sometimes, the historical note expands on a particular aspect of an element within the story - so used more as a mini-history lesson (Bruce, I believe you did this with your first book, in reference to one of the characters) - these I tend to read once I'm done with the book. (I've no other reason to read it before hand) - These I read at the beginning, as this is usually where they are situated.

More often than not, historical notes provide explanations for deviations from known history. I like these, especially when it's about a subject I'm really familiar with, since it helps me understand and trust the author a bit more. - These I tend to read the moment I locate an anomaly in the history I know. Could be at any time during the read.

I tend to ignore the footnotes. I'm simply not inspired to read them.

Mostly, I enjoy them for tidbits that wouldn't have fit into the story, and provide additional context(s), or inspiration for a character's personality. Also, I like when there's some humour in them. But I also think that humour wouldn't be right for all books.

A fascinating thread! :)

As a reader, I value historical note in the end of the novel greatly. I don;t mind if it dispels some of the events in the story or put them into a different proportion. It only makes me trust the author more, because usually, when they explain why some event not necessarily has taken place in the documented history, they also explain why they still chose to present it as such, usually a logical conclusion with enough backup behind it.
Love historical notes! :)
(but yes, only in the end of the story. If it was placed in the beginning, I probably wouldn't bother to read it anyway.)

Zoe wrote: "A fascinating thread! :)

As a reader, I value historical note in the end of the novel greatly. I don;t mind if it dispels some of the events in the story or put them into a different proportion. I..."

From another reader--to what you said--Ditto! I couldn't have said it better.

I will forgive a lot for a good author's note at the back of a historical novel. I don't count "author's notes" like the one at the end of The Other Boleyn Girl, which basically says "I cherry-picked a theory no other historians except this one believe because it's a great plot" as a "good author's note," by the way. Colleen McCullough's author's notes from the First Man in Rome series - those are great author's notes for me. Why she made X decisions, what the sources are, and then tons of extra reference material, like a plan of a typical Roman domus, etc.

I prefer most authors' notes in the back, but ones strictly about word usage are best in the front. Because that's useful when reading the actual novel.

As a writer, I was limited by the perspective of my characters. My protagonist lived in 1799 and did not have the benefit of looking back on events. I found the author note was my only way to address historical elements my characters would not have known.

As a reader, I find historical notes fascinating and always read them first.

I love Historical Notes when they are at the end of the book and follow an obviously well researched novel. Colleen McCullough writes the best historical notes ever in her Master of Rome series.

I always read the historical notes after I finish the book. The book - for me - must stand alone, and I don't want to feel like I have to read this non-fiction babble first before jumping into the story. An historical note is not a prologue. (then again, prologues are another often misused element....)

For me, the only good historical notes in fiction books are the ones which specify where the author has made some creative decisions, or whether the author has chosen to represent part of the plot/characters in a certain way even though multiple interpretations are possible based on the sources, etc. I appreciate it when an author explains where they've made creative choices, or how they went about the balancing act between the historical facts and a fictional story. I think that is a fascinating subject to read about and it tells you a lot about the author's approach to fiction and history.

I don't particularly care for historical notes which only give more background of the period but which aren't relevant to the process of turning the facts/events into the fictional story I just read. If I want to read non-fiction about the period, I'll read a non-fiction book instead.

I sometimes feel like some authors just want to add a note to show off their knowledge of the period (a reader can make up their own mind whether or not they think you know your stuff based on your book....) or they feel they NEED to add it like it's some obligatory thing for hist fic books (plenty of hist fic books without notes, many of them splendid and in no need of a historical note).

I enjoy reading the historical notes at the end of the novel. I am not a fan of references at the end of the book.

Kandice wrote: "I love Historical Notes when they are at the end of the book and follow an obviously well researched novel. Colleen McCullough writes the best historical notes ever in her Master of Rome series."

Yes, Colleen McCullough's notes are spectacular. I heard one writer say that he was not interested in reading her first book in the First Man in Rome series until he saw what detailed notes she had at the end.

In general, I love the author's notes since it gives me idea of the historical facts and often gives a summary of what happened to characters after the novel ended.

But as I've mentioned in another topic recently, I have come across inaccurate factual claims that annoyed me:

Susanna - Censored by GoodReads wrote: "...Colleen McCullough's author's notes from the First Man in Rome series - those are great author's notes for me. Why she made X decisions, what the sources are, and then tons of extra reference material, like a plan of a typical Roman domus, etc.."

McCullough's notes were in the forefront of my mind when I wrote about giving the author even more credibility when I read historical note in the end of the novel and the explanation why did the author chose to take one version upon another.
Loved her notes and read every single word of them on every single Roman novel of hers. Her research seems to be impeccable, and if she chose to have a fictional character (like Julilla in the First Man in Rome) to connected between two important historical characters, she never tried to twist anything but went straight away, presenting the accepted/recorded history in her note and her reasoning why she chose to do this her way...

An author's note is also a good chance to say "You know that really unbelievable whack-a-doodle thing that happened in Chapter 8, that thing that made the reader roll their eyes and groan `Now, really, that couldn't have happened'? Yeah, that really happened because I wouldn't dare write something that crazy."

History is stranger than fiction ever will be, and I can't count the number of times I've seen a historical novelist shake their heads over some impossible coincidence of historical fact or some completely outlandish set of historical occurances, saying "I wouldn't DARE make up something like this."

Kate wrote: "An author's note is also a good chance to say "You know that really unbelievable whack-a-doodle thing that happened in Chapter 8, that thing that made the reader roll their eyes and groan `Now, rea..."

THAT is exactly why I love well researched Historical Fiction. Truth really is stranger than fiction and reading it on a page makes me feel better about my quirky life. :D

Kate wrote: "An author's note is also a good chance to say "You know that really unbelievable whack-a-doodle thing that happened in Chapter 8, that thing that made the reader roll their eyes and groan `Now, rea..."

Yeah that happened to me in The Forever Queen by Helen Hollick

(view spoiler)[There's a crazy scene where Emma of Normandy gets trapped against some coastal cliffs in an incoming tide with her infant son. Her only choice is to climb up the cliffs while holding the wrapped up baby with her teeth! Don't get me wrong, I thought it was a great scene but didn't for one second believe it actually happened. And it didn't happen to Emma of Normandy... but it DID happen to Hollick's own grandmother (or was it great grandmother?) and she decided to use it in her novel. Amazing. (hide spoiler)]

Or Cleopatra's daughter Selene, named for the moon, dying during a lunar eclipse. Or Emperor Hadrian making a mountaintop sacrifice to Zeus, God of thunder and lightning, and a lightning bolt came down and killed the sacrificial bull. Or the fact that England was so completely conquered by the Vikings that the unconquered portion was down to one swamp with Alfred the Great squatting in it eating frog soup and running for his life, and yet he still came out and managed to reclaim the whole country.

Can't make this stuff up.

I'm with the majority here and CP and Pedro re footnotes.
Don't mind a glossary and map at the beginning of the story but like the Historical note at the end.

And it had better be a decent note with mention of useful reading matter and an explanation of the facts and any deviations! I like notes which give me an opportunity to find out more if I choose to follow up the history.

Kate wrote: "History is stranger than fiction ever will be, and I can't count the number of times I've seen a historical novelist shake their heads over some impossible coincidence of historical fact or some completely outlandish set of historical occurances, saying "I wouldn't DARE make up something like this."

Yes, indeed! And even small things that we now take for granted (Muslims don't drink alcohol, Catholic priests don't have wives) were not always true. I have a good deal of those in the notes to my Legends series.

I really appreciate an author's note at the end which describes where some liberties were taken or deviations from real life. Pointing out the stranger than fiction is also good. I prefer them at the end.

I do like a good map, or a family tree at the beginning or if there are things that need to be set-up from the beginning --- but I only skim so I can get into the story right away, and then might reference later.

In addition to enjoying good historical notes, I greatly appreciate the inclusion of a glossary when one is called for. Two exacmples of books that are better enjoyed with free use of the glossary are The First Man in Rome (the entire Masters of Rome series, actually) and Dune.

I realize Dune is not historical fiction, but the need for a glossary is present just the same. Regardless of the reason be it that the words the author is using are unfamiliar to his audience, or because he is simply making them up, including one is a kindness on the author's part.

Kandice wrote: "In addition to enjoying good historical notes, I greatly appreciate the inclusion of a glossary when one is called for. Two exacmples of books that are better enjoyed with free use of the glossary ..."

Yes, The First Man in Rome did have a huge glossary - and needed it. Even I, who studied Latin for 6 years and always had an interest in the Romans, needed it. When you do as much research as she did, and the book gets so deeply into the history, you can't do without one.

Pedro wrote: "I like author´s notes in HF books, and I usually read them, providing:
1) they are placed as back matter, never at the preface.
2) never placed in the text as footnotes or even references.
This way..."

I could not agree more with this. Bernard Cornwell does the Historical Note particularly well. I follow a similar technique in my book. I also consider them vital when you are writing about a real event or people - as I do. You need to make sure you are offering people the chance to separate the fiction from the history.

I love to read historical notes at the end too. I don't like footnotes in fiction at all and it is often hard to understand why they are not incorporated into the main text even in non-fiction.

I don't mind some information in the preface.

I actually wrote a long epilogue to my book which explained what happened in history subsequent to the end of my story but I didn't include it in the end. I have received the comment that it ends quite abruptly and one reader wanted to know what happened afterwards.

I did however include a list of all the characters mentioned by name (though I forgot one) indicating which are real and which are fictional and some basic biographical information about the real ones.

Are you still writing this, Bruce?
I'm writing a bit about the historical note myself; I have examples I'd like to bring to your attention, but you've probably moved on.